It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I don't know what to title this as.... thoughts?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I don't which forum this belongs in... but thought this an appropriate place.
My favorite writer/thinker is C.S. Lewis. I think he, like so many great thinkers, could see through the screens very well. I'm sure living so close to an oppressive regime helped there, but I think he was a notch above a lot of his (or our) contemporaries. I have been reading through his quotes, and I found this one, which really speaks volumes. I'm not trying to sway anyone anywhere, just sharing.



My contention is that good men (not bad men) consistently acting upon that position [imposing “the good”] would act as cruelly and unjustly as the greatest tyrants. They might in some respects act even worse. Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber barons cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some points be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to heaven yet at the same time likely to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on the level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.


I am interested to see the counterpoint to this.... I mean it- I am genuinely interested. I'm not baiting.
edit on 17-7-2020 by chelsdh because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: chelsdh
Is this a quotation from "The humanitarian theory of punishment"? I used to work for a small publishing company which republished that article as a pamphlet, and i thought I recognised the train of thought.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI
I believe it is.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: chelsdh
It is very relevant to the modern world, because the politcally correct think of themselves as good, and may take it upon themselves to "cure" other approaches to life. Like the Soviets classifying religion as a mental illness.

I remember the statenent, from the editor's introduction in the pamphlet, that C.S. Lewis had to send that article to an Australian journal because British journals wouldn't take it.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI
P.S. classic.austlii.edu.au...



The immediate starting point of this article was a letter I rClad in one of our Leftist weeklies. The author was pleading that a certain sin, now treated by our laws as a crime, should henceforward ,be treated as a disease. And he complained that under the present system the offender, after a term in gaol, was simply let out to return to his original environment where he would probably relapse. What he complained of was not the shutting up but the letting out. C>n his remedial view of punishment the offender should, of course, be detained until he was cured.


edit on 17-7-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 03:36 PM
link   


C.S. Lewis had to send that article to an Australian journal because British journals wouldn't take it.
a reply to: DISRAELI

That surprises me for his era, but wouldn't surprise me in today's atmosphere.

I have a huge, Bible size book of his quotes, but I don't have it with me at work, so I was perusing the internet in search of another one of his quotes, having to do with how we joke about things that might not be deemed as "appropriate" comedic material while we are in the midst of the darkness. I could paraphrase it, but I'd butcher it.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: chelsdh

"Yea and nay each hath its sway but God, He keeps the middle way" - Herman Melville (who wrote Moby Dick).

I think that we can easily, in our personal zeal for 'what is virtuous', stray into a totalitarian mindset that is hurtful. Compassion is not for the legalistic and the extremists.

True moderates listen openly and empathize.

Often the villain is also an anti-hero, forced to do what they do by circumstance, and motivated by their goodness, into doing wrong.

edit on 17/7/2020 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut



Often the villain is also an anti-hero, forced to do what they do by circumstance, and motivated by their goodness, into doing wrong.

Indeed. Monsters aren't born, the grow into the monster.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 05:01 PM
link   
The reason our creator gave us free will we are not made to like forced following.

Also why we are not to be a part of this world and not to judge.
We are clearly to flawed to judge our fellow man.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Title:
Thoughts on CS Lewis



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 06:53 PM
link   
or simply put, " the road to hell is paved with good intentions"a reply to: chelsdh



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: chelsdh

Interesting quotation, and brings many things to mind.

The thought of good men acting on what they think as good reminds me of those who try to impose their own morality onto others. For instance, if one thinks pornography is wrong, or abortion is wrong, or drugs are wrong, or showing leg/face are wrong, they seek to impose that will—through a legal course, and therefore enact laws—to make their will lawful.
In essence, it's the busybodies doing all they can to change society through laws and legislators, when those in power might necessarily not do the same, or at least without their constituents pushing them to.

So, how are they ore dangerous? Personal decisions are just that: personal. If they, in effect, harm no one, why do the busybodies even care? Because the busybodies want their way of life/beliefs as law.

While there are good (personal) intentions in the reasons people do these things, or want things criminalized, that they insert themselves into others' lives when it does not directly affect them is one of the reason for so many problems, even currently, that "good" intention (ultimately good to them) is not good those against whom it's directed (such as anti-abortion laws). So is it truly good?

So, while living under tyranny is certainly undesirable, when one's own community seeks to undermine the freedom that everyone should have for themselves—absent criminality that harms life or property—could be arguable as far worse.

Then again, and in conclusion, state oppression is largely derivative of social influence and consensus, which is why the latter—busybodies—are dangerous.

Are they really the same, or are they reciprocal? After all, authoritarians rely on citizenry to report that which is unsavory to the community or the regime.

Why can't people just mind their own FN business?
edit on 17-7-2020 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 08:17 PM
link   
No man knows how bad he truly is
Until he try's to be very good.......
One of his little tid bits that really stuck with me



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: FreeFalling

Yes, I read that one today as well. And sent it to a dear friend who has impressed me beyond words with how much he has grown. But, he still feels like he’s not doing enough to be a better man.



posted on Jul, 17 2020 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence
Thank you for your views in it! I very much appreciate it and see reason in most of it. It is kind of a 2 way street.

I think the crux here is personal choices- that which affects only the person in question. Mind altering substances should be legalized, so long as the user can’t harm another. Now, abortion is trickier, because many believe (not arbitrarily or without reason) that the fetus is another person. So that area is grey. I also think the porn industry isn’t without its victims. Though I think prostitution should be legalized.

I agree that if people would tend to themselves more than their neighbors then all the problems caused by “busybodies” would greatly diminish.



posted on Jul, 18 2020 @ 08:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: chelsdh
a reply to: chr0naut



Often the villain is also an anti-hero, forced to do what they do by circumstance, and motivated by their goodness, into doing wrong.

Indeed. Monsters aren't born, the grow into the monster.


The anti-hero comments reminded me of a 1995 independent film "Dead Man" starring Johnny Depp. I liked it esp. for the cameo appearances, but the music got annoying half way through.

Dead Man
edit on 18-7-2020 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Added Links



posted on Jul, 18 2020 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I have never seen that, but after checking out the link (And the “starring” list), I am gonna have to.
Thanks!



posted on Jul, 18 2020 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: chelsdh
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I have never seen that, but after checking out the link (And the “starring” list), I am gonna have to.
Thanks!


Great film, great acting, directing, cinematography (black and white), with just a bit of absurdism for effect, and music by Neil Young.

One of my faves.



posted on Jul, 18 2020 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: lowballer
or simply put, " the road to hell is paved with good intentions"a reply to: chelsdh


Had the same thought. Some other things come to mind, the film Demolition Man and also the second episode in the first season of Black Mirror, among many others like Ayn Rands Anthem (novella) and etc.

To force somebody to be "cured" or to force a certain standard of living without an individuals consent is essentially rape imo. I would rather live in a hive community which allows each individual to decide for himself what is best for himself. However I do believe that some things should always be enforced and investigated (against our will and without our consent) like murder, rape, theft, etc. Otherwise the autonomy and privacy of an individual should be respected at all times in all ways, privacy of mental properties and physical properties both.

Sorry I didn't add to the counterpoint- except... it's almost like raising children. Do you ask your child for consent to bathe and what to feed it? It's too young to make informed decisions for itself- so you impose your will over theirs over and over again... but part of parenthood should be to educate children until they are ready to be fully autonomous and make their own decisions.

During that process though some people never recognize the autonomy of the child and continue to oppress it forever under the role of an eternal parenthood.

If you view people as incapable of being fully autonomous, I think this tyrannical state can happen. And to be honest, would you consider many adults to be fully autonomous and informed?

In some ways, it could be said that most adults are still just children living under the protection and safety of civilization- they don't need to know much to survive as all of their needs are being met already, and even though they might think that they are making their own decisions... they are often just being lead and handheld and told what to do and how to live all of their lives and that's ok.

Something somebody told me once comes to mind, he said that probably over 90% of people who approach a salad bar will always choose the salad that's already mixed (the caesar, or garden, etc) instead of creating their own... because they don't want to make a choice because then they may be faced with making the wrong choice. People are adult children.

Also in relation to that, sometimes the actions of these adult-children affect our lives personally in negative ways. So why shouldn't we be able to enforce a certain standard of living on them, these adult-children, so that our lives are not affected negatively? In many ways we already do this, it's just a matter of where the line lies of which we should not cross. Like for example in my opinion, hurt feelings and being offended/insulted is not cause to enforce a certain standard of living on others, depending on the offense of course (if it's not murder, rape, theft, etc). There is a line between saying and thinking something "offensive" and then actually doing something offensive.
edit on 18-7-2020 by geezlouise because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2020 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: chelsdh



Monsters aren't born, the grow into the monster.


How did these 2 grow into monsters able to mutilate and kill in a short 10 years? I've often scratched my head.


en.wikipedia.org...


James Patrick Bulger (16 March 1990[1] – 12 February 1993) was a 2-year-old boy from Kirkby, Merseyside, England, who was abducted, tortured and killed by two 10-year-old boys, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, on Friday, 12 February 1993.[2][3] Bulger was led away from the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle as his mother had taken her eyes off him momentarily. His mutilated body was found



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join